Pedigree Query

Who is a steal right now at stud?

Who is over priced?

I love Tribal Rule for 5k. He had a world of talent even though we never really saw it. I think he could have been the fastest Storm Cat if he had been a little more sound. His 3/4 bro Yankee Victor proved to be just that in having 7 & change speed but again he was not the soundest of horses either as are most really fast horses. TR is a half to G1 winner Key Phrase from the family of Cal stallion Pirates Bounty. TR def needs the right kind of mares but with that I think he has a great shot at being a real sleeper.

Slew83 wrote:Who is a steal right now at stud?

Who is over priced?

I like Unusual Heat at $6,500 but hear he is going up considerably. Would still consider at $12,500 & under. We shall see


Formal Gold has some pretty good ones though his AEI is a bit weak.. still I like him and he was a heck of a runner himself... will throw some good ones before he's done.

At $5,000 Swiss Yodeler is more thanworth it especially if looking for a fast two year old. Breed him to better mares and who knows what you might get.

I have always really liked Beau Genius from a confirmational/soundeness standpoint. I'll bet you can deal to $5,000 even perhaps $3,500 on him(listed at $7,500) as he'll be 21 in '06. Broodmare sire of Sis City.

In Excess is one of the best $20,000 studs standing in the U.S. though soundness is a concern

The thing about the California market is that breeders here seem to chase bandwagons based on one big horse and then drop them like a hot potato if they grow cold. At one point, Bertrando was $30,000; now he's $12,500. You can get to Memo for a song and I was surprised to see that he only bred 30 mares last year. Apparently, they all flocked to Atticus who bred over 100.

Another thing is just how much home support a stallion has to have to make it here. Some of that is geography: if you are boarded in Northern California and you're interested in a stallion in San Diego county, that can be an all day van ride and at least a 3 month stay at an unfamiliar farm that could be 400 miles away from where you live. Not quite the vanning in to be bred that you can do in the Bluegrass. Recently, there was a discussion about nonrefundable fees in California and what chump would pay them. I'm frankly more concerned about the quality of the stallion and the quality of the care that a mare might receive away from home. I've actually decided against stallions based on the farm that they stood at and the general reputation that farm has in the community for the care they give. I've decided against stallions because I would have to ship from North to South and have the foal she was carrying raised for the first several months at a certain farm and then take the young foal on the vanride back. It probably would work out, but the risk was a factor in my decision.

BTW, of the stallions mentioned, Formal Gold is one of the most intriguing because he appears to be on the verge of a breakout year. Miss Matched just won a graded stakes, Bear in the Woods just won an allowance at Hollywood and appears ready to go on, and there are 5 or so others running around the country in small stakes or allowance level races that might make a step up in class at some point. He also has some unraced two year olds training very well. Perhaps not what Kentucky wanted but he sure looked awfully good in California for the price when I was looking at stallions last year.

California has never supported unproven sires like Kentucky has but there are some here worth checking out. Skimming is clearly the cream of the crop and has been priced right and is well supported. I loved Redatorre as a racehorse. I've heard good things about Golden Eagle's High Demand. Of course, at this point, you are either taking the ride up or you are going straight to the basement--no one really knows.

horsenuts wrote:[
At $5,000 Swiss Yodeler is more thanworth it especially if looking for a fast two year old. Breed him to better mares and who knows what you might get.

Hi Horsenuts,

Actually, the most prolific breeder to Swiss Yodeler is starting to find out that Swiss Yodeler's are better when started at 3, and/or only lightly raced at 2. They go long too! I think Californians got a bit stupid with pushing on Swiss Yodelers so early. Swiss Yodeler himself, might have been a better older horse, had he not been campaigned so hard at 2. JMHO, as an owner of a Swiss Yodeler 3 y/o in training.

Sysonby wrote:I've decided against stallions because I would have to ship from North to South and have the foal she was carrying raised for the first several months at a certain farm and then take the young foal on the vanride back. It probably would work out, but the risk was a factor in my decision. ...

BTW, of the stallions mentioned, Formal Gold is one of the most intriguing because he appears to be on the verge of a breakout year.

I've done the same thing. It's one of the reasons I've become a big proponent of AI. Also think highly of Formal Gold, Beau Genius and In Excess. And would add Devon Lane, if he's in CA.

hurleynyc wrote:

Sysonby wrote:I've decided against stallions because I would have to ship from North to South and have the foal she was carrying raised for the first several months at a certain farm and then take the young foal on the vanride back. It probably would work out, but the risk was a factor in my decision. ...

BTW, of the stallions mentioned, Formal Gold is one of the most intriguing because he appears to be on the verge of a breakout year.

I've done the same thing. It's one of the reasons I've become a big proponent of AI. Also think highly of Formal Gold, Beau Genius and In Excess. And would add Devon Lane, if he's in CA.

You can't allow AI next thing you know you'll have studs siring 100+ mares a year and that's why AI has never been considered in TB breeding .

horsenuts wrote:You can't allow AI next thing you know you'll have studs siring 100+ mares a year and that's why AI has never been considered in TB breeding .

Well gosh...isn't that what they do now W/O AI

BJ wrote:

horsenuts wrote:You can't allow AI next thing you know you'll have studs siring 100+ mares a year and that's why AI has never been considered in TB breeding .

Well gosh...isn't that what they do now W/O AI

Indeed it is BJ.. indeed it is. I can remember 20-25 years ago when stud's were first being booked to 60 mares which people thought was "over the top". Today many are bred to twice that # and some 3 times that #. Some even breed to 6-7 times that many(60 X 7 = 420)with year around breeding now commonplace.

Again, I question how virile a stud remains after so many breedings in a season and whether he can pass on the best of his qualities after being so wrung out. I also question the neuroligical effects on a stallion going up on his backend that many times.

Also, farms are introduced to so many outside "bugs" etc. with mares coming from all over the U.S. This practice alone is a recipe for trouble and another reason that AI needs to be considered. Now that the AI arguement has been squashed(over-production of certain sires) it's time the TB industry moved into the 21st century.

I won't be surprised if ceratin states/tracks challenge the AI rule shortly and allow the practice. The "blue-bloods" may end up seething in their own juices over this issue in the end. Will be interesting to follow as nothing stays the same in this world. Breeding certain stallions to 100s of mares a year has opened up this possibility like never before, IMO.

horsenuts wrote: I won't be surprised if ceratin states/tracks challenge the AI rule shortly and allow the practice. The "blue-bloods" may end up seething in their own juices over this issue in the end. Will be interesting to follow as nothing stays the same in this world. Breeding certain stallions to 100s of mares a year has opened up this possibility like never before, IMO.

Individual tracks and/or states can allow anything they wish, but it won't do them much good if the Jockey Club continues to refuse to register offspring conceived by AI. For the purposes of racing and breeding in this country "Thoroughbred" means Jockey Club registered, so the JC is pretty much the one in control on this issue.

LSB wrote:

horsenuts wrote: I won't be surprised if ceratin states/tracks challenge the AI rule shortly and allow the practice. The "blue-bloods" may end up seething in their own juices over this issue in the end. Will be interesting to follow as nothing stays the same in this world. Breeding certain stallions to 100s of mares a year has opened up this possibility like never before, IMO.

Individual tracks and/or states can allow anything they wish, but it won't do them much good if the Jockey Club continues to refuse to register offspring conceived by AI. For the purposes of racing and breeding in this country "Thoroughbred" means Jockey Club registered, so the JC is pretty much the one in control on this issue.

Could state-bred programs opt out of the JC for this purpose? Once the damn is breached the rest will perhaps follow?

The JC has lost most if not all credibility IMO. Horses siring 200-400 offspring a year? What more needs to be said.

horsenuts wrote:Could state-bred programs opt out of the JC for this purpose? Once the damn is breached the rest will perhaps follow?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Do you think that states should sponsor races for unregistered TBs and find tracks willing to run them? I can't imagine why they would want to do something like that, or what they'd have to gain.

horsenuts wrote:

LSB wrote:
Individual tracks and/or states can allow anything they wish, but it won't do them much good if the Jockey Club continues to refuse to register offspring conceived by AI. For the purposes of racing and breeding in this country "Thoroughbred" means Jockey Club registered, so the JC is pretty much the one in control on this issue.

horsenuts wrote:
Could state-bred programs opt out of the JC for this purpose? Once the damn is breached the rest will perhaps follow?

The JC has lost most if not all credibility IMO. Horses siring 200-400 offspring a year? What more needs to be said.

What DOES the Jockey Club do besides keep a database and charge fees? Hmmm...maybe they could have a program where when you stand a stallion you have to decide if he will stand "live cover" or AI. Can't do both. They could limit the number of matings to each stallion, no matter what method is used. AI stallion farms would clearly have lower overhead.

I think the biggest problem the JC has with AI is verification. But that could all be done with the paperwork/paper trail/certification.

It is going to take a big name stallion ending up with Wobbler's or some other spinal/neuro disorder, to get them to put a cap on the number of live covers per stallion. It IS a form of animal cruelty to breed them to so many mares like that. Not to mention how much overbreeding there already is...

BJ, You mean like Seattle Slew?

LSB wrote:

horsenuts wrote:Could state-bred programs opt out of the JC for this purpose? Once the damn is breached the rest will perhaps follow?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Do you think that states should sponsor races for unregistered TBs and find tracks willing to run them? I can't imagine why they would want to do something like that, or what they'd have to gain.

I could see it happening in states that are "off the beaten path" looking to establish an industry of there own. Or even a conglomeration of states coming together and agreeing on such a program. These horses may only be allowed to compete in said state bred programs but if they are lucrative enough.. well....

Business models are always changing. The JC has been dictating for decades yet has egg on its face with studs now breeding 100-200 mares a season and another 200 in the Southern Hemisphere in some instances.

The "emperor has no clothes"(JC). Just a matter of time until someone(group)points it out to him(them).